Fatima Priest Harassed in Rome…

Fatima Priest Harassed in Rome…

Watch the three short interviews with Fr Gruner below, and tell us what you think about his treatment at the hands of Vatican Security. Are you surprised?


Comments (106)

  • Michaela

    I haven’t watched all three videos, just the first one but no, I’m not surprised that poor Father Gruner has been harassed by Vatican security. He’s number one enemy due to his persistence in asking for the Russian Consecration and full Third Secret.

    I look forward to seeing the second and third parts of the interview tomorrow.

    November 13, 2013 at 11:39 pm
    • editor

      All three videos are well worth watching. As you say “poor Fr Gruner” : Hans Kung is welcome in the Vatican but not Fr Gruner. You just couldn’t make it up…

      November 14, 2013 at 12:16 am
      • waynekelland

        Hans Kung wasn’t suspended like Fr Gruner and he was invited for a private meeting. Having said that, I bet Hans Kung didn’t wear clerical clothing. Why is Fr Gruner pretending to be a priest in good standing when he is suspended? He wasn’t inited to the Vatican and shouldn’t have been there because he shouldn’t be undertaking any ministry. I wonder who paid for his visit? I smell corruption.

        November 17, 2013 at 11:23 pm
    • waynekelland

      Fr Gruner is his own worse enemy. What was he doing at the Vatican marian ceremonies when he is suspended and not allow to wear clerical attire or exercise any ministry whatsoever?

      November 17, 2013 at 11:19 pm
  • leprechaun

    I wonder if Pope Francis knows that Fr. Gruner has been forbidden to draw near? Or has the instruction to the Security Services come from some jobsworth acting under the orders of the those whose aim is the introduction of The New World Order?

    It would be interesting if Fr. Gruner could get one of his own, trusted, inside men to put that question to pope Francis.

    November 14, 2013 at 10:56 am
    • editor

      I doubt very much if Fr Gruner has any “trusted inside men” close enough to speak to Pope Francis. I doubt that very much indeed.

      I’ve just remembered that Leo posted a page containing the above three videos on another thread some weeks ago, There were no comments, sadly, at that time, so I presume there will be few this time either. Leo’s link, however, had an additional video, with the observation that the Vatican Security staff were not a t all bothered about keeping Buddhists away from the Pope:

      November 14, 2013 at 11:27 am
      • Margaret Mary

        I think Fr Gruner is always going to be unpopular in Rome until the Consecration of Russia is done. The Church is completely disoriented just now due to ecumenism so it’s not surprising that Buddhists are welcomed by the Pope and not Fr Gruner.

        November 14, 2013 at 12:33 pm
      • catholicconvert1

        Buddhists= wolves in lamb’s clothing. An evil religion like Islam.

        November 19, 2013 at 1:11 pm
  • Frankier

    Ian Paisley and pastor Jack Glass used to go regularly to the Vatican and roar out that the Pope was the anti-Christ and nobody batted an eyelid. They are no better than the KGB.

    November 14, 2013 at 5:02 pm
    • waynekelland

      Interesting fact but nothing to do with Fr Gruner’s case. I don’t believe Ian Paisley or Jack Glass ever got entry into Vatican city to do their dirty work.

      Editor: Yes they did – here’s one report straight from one horse’s mouth

      November 18, 2013 at 7:44 am
  • 3littleshepherds

    I think that even if Fr. Gruner were to talk to Pope Francis it would do no good. But he’s a hero for all of his efforts, that’s for sure. No one has done more for Our Lady’s cause and he is misunderstood and ill treated because he is the chief fighter for the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart.

    I wonder, too, if the Pope knows the Third Secret or even if it, the spoken text, exists anymore. Or if it has been “lost” in the archives.
    I used to think Sister Lucy meant that the Third Secret should be read in 1960 because it would be more clearly understood because of the revolution in the Church. But then again maybe the Secret was tampered with around that time and after 1960 it was unclear and so it needed to be read to the world while it was still complete.
    It might be that Cardinal Bertone never saw the spoken text and that at the most they only knew it by word of mouth, another good way to muddy the waters.

    November 14, 2013 at 5:53 pm
  • Nicky

    I think anyone but Fr Gruner would be welcome in the Vatican – him and Bishop Fellay of course.

    I am not so charitable about the Third Secret. I bet they’ve all read it but won’t act on it because it warns of the terrible aftermath of Vatican II and that is ideologically offensive to all those involved which means all the top men since the Council took place.

    I haven’t yet watched the videos but am looking forward to hearing the details of the harassment.

    November 14, 2013 at 5:58 pm
    • 3littleshepherds

      I agree with you about the content for sure, but unless God prevented it, I can’t see why they wouldn’t tamper with the evidence. The commentary the Vatican released was beyond ridiculous.
      I wouldn’t be surprised if the city of Rome is not mentioned. So many prophecies point to it’s destruction or nearly so. Fr. Malachi Martin said the secret states several chastisements, one of which is so terrible it really has not been expressed nor thought of. It seems he meant a “reckoning” as he called it. So we really owe Fr. Gruner our gratitude for trying so hard to help us.

      November 14, 2013 at 6:41 pm
      • 3littleshepherds

        This 1949 quote from Pope Pius XII is interesting: “If there should ever come a day –We say this as a matter of pure hypothesis –when the physical reality of Rome were to crumble; if ever this Vatican Basilica, the symbol of the one, invincible, and victorious Catholic Church, were to bury beneath its ruins the historical treasures and the sacred tombs it enshrines, even then the Church would not, by that fact, be overthrown or undermined; the promise of Christ to Peter would always remain true, the Papacy would continue unchanged, as well as the one, indestructible Church founded on the Pope alive at that time.”

        November 14, 2013 at 7:10 pm
    • waynekelland

      If Fr Gruner wants to be made welcome at the Vatican then he needs to show obedience and obey his clerical suspension that was upheld by the highest roman court.

      I seem to remember that Bishop Fellay was made welcome at the Vatican and chose to throw the hospitality back in the face of Pope Benedict.

      Both men are their own worst enemies.

      November 17, 2013 at 11:29 pm
  • crofterlady

    Our Lady’s E-Newsletter: November 2013


    Pope Francis to Meet Vladimir Putin

    Pope Francis and Vladimir Putin will soon be sitting down face-to-face to discuss world affairs. (See: “Pope Francis to hold talks with Russian leader at Vatican”.) Other Russian leaders have met with popes in recent years, but Putin has distinguished himself from his predecessors by showing a marked sympathy for Russia’s past as a Christian nation.

    While Putin’s personal beliefs may be a matter of speculation, and his sincerity open to doubt, it cannot be denied that he has taken a public posture that favors traditional Christian morality. He has been staunch in his opposition to homosexual propaganda, even at the cost of considerable public-relations pressure for the upcoming Winter Olympics. (See: “Russia will develop as democratic state, defend Christian values – Putin”.)

    The meeting may be significant for another reason: there is an acknowledged possibility that Pope Francis may visit Russia. The bar to a papal visit in the past has not come from the Kremlin, but rather from a lack of invitation from the Russian Orthodox Church. The Russian Orthodox, however, have softened their stance against the Church of Rome in recent times and may welcome a visit by the Pope. (See: “Pope meeting Putin, could help mend Catholic-Orthodox relations”.)

    We know that Russia has been chosen by Heaven to play a special role in salvation history. (See: http://www.fatima.org/consecrussia/) So any analysis of Russia’s interaction with the Vatican, and especially with the Pope, must allow that the workings of Providence may supersede the conclusions of human wisdom. Granting this, we can still examine situation in terms we can readily understand.

    Russian leaders of church and state appear to realize how dire is the situation that prevails in Russian society: decades of official state atheism forced her to a breakdown in morality that has had, and continues to have, terrible consequences. The abortion rate is appalling. Alcoholism is epidemic. Life spans are short. The population is shrinking. (See: “History of Post-soviet Russia – Economic Depression and Social Decay” and “Duma Approves Bill Banning Abortion Ads” and “Russian Poison — Alcohol”.)

    Unless trends are reversed, Russia will become a nation incapable of any constructive effort. Russian leaders want to find a means to counter contemporary decadence. They seem to have come to the same conclusion as the great Russian writer Alexander Solzhenitsyn, who saw Russia’s salvation in a return to her Christian roots. (See: “An Interview with Alexander Solzhenitsyn”.)

    Some historical circumstances, which is simply another way of saying the Divine Plan, appear to have created the situation in which Russia and the West are coming closer together, but not through any political initiative, but through shared faith in Our Lord and Our Lady.

    Pope Francis has consecrated his papacy to Our Lady of Fatima. He clearly loves Our Lady. What is preventing him from performing the consecration of Russia as She requested? We cannot know at this point, but we can note that a growing sympathy between Russia and the West, based on those elements of Faith shared by the Orthodox and the Catholic may create an atmosphere in which prudential objections to a consecration may no longer be persuasive. Let us pray that this meeting between Pope Francis and Vladimir Putin may bring us closer to the day when Our Lady of Fatima will be obeyed and Her blessings will bring peace to our tormented world.

    Get your FREE copy of The Fatima Crusader! Provide your name and mailing address on the form at https://secure.fatima.org/forms/crusader.asp or call toll-free 1-800-263-8160. There is NO OBLIGATION of any kind.

    We must work and pray ever more fervently that the Holy Father and the bishops will heed the requests of Our Lady of Fatima. (See: Petition to Our Holy Father — The Consecration of Russia and Petition to Our Holy Father — The Release of the full Third Secret.)

    We must also keep informed. Read the recent “Fatima Perspectives” articles listed below.

    Vatican Turns Off the Apparitions Tap

    There are doubtless many devout people who have become very attached to what they believe to be messages received from Our Lady through the seers of Medjugorje. With all due respect to the pious intentions of those who may believe in these apparitions, it has to be said that there are plausible reasons for doubting the authenticity.

    The episcopal investigation by the diocese where the alleged apparitions occurred concluded that no evidence of a supernatural event can be discovered, and therefore, the apparitions and the messages supposedly delivered to the seers were not to be credited to Our Lady. (See: “Bishop of Medjugorje . . . Declares Apparitions Are Not Real”.)

    Despite the warning of the local bishop, people continued to flock to Medjugorje and the cult grew exponentially. Even a growing number of scandals involving the seers and the clergy failed to dissuade devotion. (See: “Medjugorje: The Actual Situation Today (March 2010)”.)

    Now, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has intervened. As one of the seers is poised to begin a tour in the United States, the Apostolic Nuncio, Archbishop Vigano, has relayed an instruction to the secretary of the United States Catholic Bishops Conference forbidding Catholics to participate in devotional gatherings centered on the Medjugorje apparitions. (See: “Vatican gives firm thumbs-down to ‘seers’ of Medjugorje”.)

    One of the curious aspects of these tours by the Medjugorje seers is the promise that those who come to see them will witness an apparition, or rather, will witness the seer experiencing an apparition. The claim appears presumptuous, to say the least, and in itself should be enough to cast doubt on the whole proceeding.

    Meanwhile, Our Lady’s apparitions at Fatima, honored by the Church as authentic, must compete for attention with such dubious phenomena as Medjugorje and other alleged apparitions. One may be permitted to wonder who benefits by the spreading of unapproved and doubtful apparitions. We would do well to stick to whatever is certain.

    If we wish to honor Our Lady, let us do as She asks. We can perform the First Saturday Devotions as Our Lady requested (see: “First Saturday Communion of Reparation Checklist”) and we can pray with all our hearts that at long last the Holy Father and the bishops of the Catholic Church will consecrate Russia as our Lady of Fatima has commanded.

    November 14, 2013 at 8:44 pm
  • 3littleshepherds

    Even though Russia is chosen by God to chastise the world Sr. Lucia spoke of Our Lady’s great love for that country. This inspired Sr. Lucia to also love Russia. It’s fascinating, and mysterious.
    What brings the Pope and Bishops to finally make the consecration? It’s to be done in order to “save” Russia. Does that mean to convert it to the Catholic Faith and also perhaps save it from some material catastrophe?

    November 14, 2013 at 9:38 pm
    • editor


      We have Our Lady’s promise that Russia will be converted to the Faith after the Consecration. Material chastisements are a different kettle of consequences altogether, and Sr Lucia said somewhere that she was not concerned with such (words to that effect).

      In haste, so if I’ve got it wrong… well… someone is sure to point it out 🙂

      November 14, 2013 at 10:25 pm
      • 3littleshepherds

        Editor, Just talking about what moves the Pope to consecrate Russia. Like what draws his attention to Russia. If they had famine, war, nuclear disasters, etc. this might be why they would actually consecrate the nation. The Consecration is to bring about Russia’s conversion, but many people think something will push them to actually do the act of consecration.
        Russia spreading her errors didn’t move them, not yet.
        I wasn’t saying the Consecration was willed by heaven to prevent a material chastisement. And how you could think I would, really! (I’m practicing my new get tough replies.) 🙂 (I’m copying Athanasius from now on when I’m misunderstood, he was so good at it)

        November 14, 2013 at 11:13 pm
      • 3littleshepherds

        You mean this Editor:
        Sr. Lucia’s interview with Fr. Fuentes, she says to him,
        “Por esto, Padre, no es mi misión indicarle al mundo los castigos materiales que ciertamente vendrán sobre la tierra si el mundo antes no hace oración y penitencia. No. Mi misión es indicarles a todos el inminente peligro en que estamos de perder para siempre nuestra alma si seguimos aferrados al pecado.”

        November 15, 2013 at 12:43 am
      • editor

        That’s it! It is not her mission to tell the world about material punishments but to tell us that we will lose our souls if we persist in sin.

        November 15, 2013 at 10:12 am
      • editor


        Love your new tough replies!

        And, yes, I know what you mean – sounds like something very serious happens that makes the Pope consecrate Russia, I agree. I think we get that impression from the part of the Third Secret revealed (“Bishop in white”, bodies, bows and arrows….) But I’ve heard people suggest that this may be the picture of what WILL happen if the Consecration is not done and so maybe if there is a grave threat, such as a third world war imminent, then the Pope will consecrate.

        I must say, watching the news bulletins about the Philippines, when I heard one broadcaster say that they had no houses, no hospitals, no schools, no shops, nothing, I did find myself asking: “is this not the annihilation of a nation?” However, Fr Gruner argues that by “annihilation of nations” (as opposed to “states”) Our Lady meant “peoples” not just places. So if that is true, we’re not at that final stage of annihilation of whole peoples yet. There is, therefore, hope that the Pope will see such events unfolding and decide that the time has come to do as Our Lady asked and consecrate Russia before he ends up being the “bishop in white” described in the Third Secret. I know I would!

        I stress, however, that I don’t know. Like Cephas, I’m no expert on this – though I’m an expert on other things such as being glamorous, slim, witty, etc.:-) .

        November 15, 2013 at 10:02 am
  • Cephas

    I have to admit, I am a complete dunce when it comes to the third secret of Fatima (even though I have read the newsletter and blog for a while now). What does the community at Fatima say about the third secret? Millions go on pilgrimage every year to Fatima and are welcomed and administered to by the community there. Surely these people have a special devotion to our lady and her messages. What do they say? Do they promote the consecration of Russia? I have never been and as I have said I am absolutely no expert, I simply look for help in understanding. Thank you.

    November 14, 2013 at 9:51 pm
    • editor


      This is a flying visit with time only to post a new think from the Fatima website, a timeline with a brief summary of everything about Fatima.

      I’ll try to post something later or at some point tomorrow but would like to think this is of use in the meantime. I’d even go so far as to say that once you’ve read this timeline, you will definitely be an expert 🙂

      November 14, 2013 at 10:21 pm
      • Cephas

        Thank you very much Madam editor, I will have a good read just now

        November 14, 2013 at 10:24 pm
      • editor

        Pleasure, Cephas. Let me know if you find the link helpful.

        November 14, 2013 at 10:25 pm
  • Theresa Rose

    The three videos are well worth watching. I agree with Michaela that it is no wonder that Fr. Gruner has been harassed by the Vatican security, who issued specific instructions that he was not to speak to Pope Francis.
    Father is faithful to Our Lady in asking that the Consecration of Russia be done and that the 3rd Secret be revealed.


    You are right to ask the question as to who issued those orders. But I also wonder who told the Pope not to consecrate the world. Yet it is Russia who is to be consecrated and not the world.

    Fr. Gruner mentions in the 3rd video “That that there is a major force outside the Church which is threatening the Church in a major way against the Church”.

    Perhaps this link might give some answer to that


    Since Pope Benedict XV (1914/1922), Our Lady appeared at Fatima during his watch. There have been 8 Popes since that time and not one has consecrated Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Though some have consecrated the world. And the Third Secret has yet to be revealed.

    But the Consecration of Russia will be done.

    November 15, 2013 at 11:40 am
  • Clotilde

    Thankyou Theresa Rose for this video.
    I haven’t read any of Fr. malachi’s books but will certainly do so . How did we get this far down the road? The talk by Suzanne certainly lifts the veil on why Our Lady’s concecration must be done soon.
    If the Pope is not willing it is up to the faithful to pray that he receives the grace to do it but it looks limpoosible at the moment. We cant just blame the forces of nature anymore. God help us.
    Immaculate Heart of Mary spare us.

    November 15, 2013 at 1:31 pm
  • 3littleshepherds

    Our Lady of Guadadupe was named Patron of Latin America by Pope Pius X in 1910. So this includes Argentina.
    It is also interesting that she is very similar to the woman in chapter 12 of the Apocalypse who gives birth to a child destined to rule all nations with a rod of iron. Some commentators on the Apocalypse interpret that as a papal election and that the Pope does something to cause the dragon, the devil, to be thrown out of heaven, the Church.
    Who knows. But it’s interesting. Some Pope will be repent and consecrate Russia.
    This is from wikipedia:

    The iconography of the Virgin is fully Catholic: [28] Miguel Sanchez, the author of the 1648 tract Imagen de la Virgen María, described her as the Woman of the Apocalypse from the New Testament’s Revelation 12:1, “clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars,”. [20][29]

    “[W]hat is rarely mentioned is that the frame which surrounded the canvas was lowered to leave almost no space above the Virgin’s head, thereby obscuring the effects of the erasure.” [30] She is described as a representation of the Immaculate Conception. [20]

    November 15, 2013 at 5:32 pm
    • 3littleshepherds

      That’s from the wikipedia entry on Our Lady of Guadalupe.

      November 15, 2013 at 5:34 pm
  • Clotilde

    Yes Little Shepherds, Our Lady of Guadaloupe came to the rescue of the S Americans when they slaughtered millions in order to appease the Sun God.Her image is in front of the sun to show how the natives must now pray to to the true God through Mary the Mother of God. I hope that she will now come their rescue and ours again to rid us of the killing of the unborn.

    Some of us pray the rosary every week at 3pm on a Friday, outside the main general hospital where some abortions are performed.

    November 15, 2013 at 5:53 pm
    • 3littleshepherds

      I also read that she was made patron of the unborn by Pope John Paul and I think one of the Pope’s made her a patron of the Philippines. And they have recently been consecrated to the Immaculate Heart which they needed desperately. They have some kind of terrible abortion laws, right? And every kind of natural disasters, earthquakes, typhoons, flooding, and I believe disease carrying mosquitoes!

      I hope the people there all turn to Our Lady and live that consecration.

      November 15, 2013 at 6:27 pm
  • Clotilde

    3 Little Sheperds
    Yes, One of the Bishops consecrated his province Alday(I think) to The Immaculate Heart of Mary 10 years ago and it has been spared from the worst of the typhoon as the winds were less even though it is in the east which usually bears the brunt of the storms. As far as I know they have been fighting against the introduction of abortion and those who which to inflict reproductive rights on the people as we have in the west.

    November 15, 2013 at 10:01 pm
  • waynekelland

    To me this sounds like a whole load of fabricated nonsense and high jinx. FR GRUNER IS SUSPENDED AND HE KNOWS IT. He appealed against his suspension to the apostolic signature (highest vatican court) which upheld it. So he obviously knows that he was suspended otherwise he couldn’t have appealed the decision. He may deny or even have managed to avoid being served any papers but that doesn’t stop the appeal decision being upheld, valid and legal. It’s beyond belief that he is unaware of the appeal decision or made any attempt to find out the outcome. All he has to do is google his name to find out that he is suspended. As he i s suspended he shouldn’t be wearing a clerical collar or cassock, saying mass or being involved in any kind of priestly ministry. To do so incurs the penalty of excommunication. Furthermore to try and use a religious ceremony as a stunt to wave a huge banner advocating an erroneous belief is nothing short of campaigning which is inappropriate and shameful.

    I don’t even think the accounts portrayed constitute harassment. He was quite reasonably questioned about his presence and asked not to present himself to the pope, as is the right and duty of Vatican security. Presumably he would have used such an encounter as a photo opportunity to publicise his erroneous beliefs further. If I had been in charge of Vatican security, he would have had his clerical collar publically removed and escorted off Vatican grounds. I assume they didn’t want to create a scene so let him be but hopefully his name is on a Vatican blacklist somewhere so in the future he won’t get a chance to enter Vatican city ever again.

    Why is the blog-site supporting and giving publicity to a suspended priest?

    November 16, 2013 at 5:04 pm
    • 3littleshepherds

      If Fr. Gruner seeks the Lord, who are you and I to judge?
      Are you actually saying Fr. Gruner has NO RIGHT to follow his conscience?
      Why don’t you listen to Pope Francis and try to understand rather than to judge so harshly?

      November 16, 2013 at 6:22 pm
    • Lily


      Fr Gruner is not suspended and I’m sure YOU know it – you can read all about him if you follow this link http://www.fatimapriest.com/content.html

      November 16, 2013 at 6:35 pm
    • Frankier

      If you had been in charge of Vatican security he would have had his clerical collar publicly removed and escorted off Vatican grounds. My, my, what a tough statement. Would you have publicly removed the collars of the many scores of paedophile priests who may have been in the crowd and who have caused so much grief for the ordinary Catholics in their places of work? No I didn’t think so. If Russia has indeed been consecrated, then when can we expect Our Lady to fulfill her promises? I don’t know too much about Fr Gruner but anything I have learned through you would hardly put me against him. At least he won’t be the centre of scandal in any of the world’s media outlets for flying a banner with a message from Our Lady.

      November 17, 2013 at 1:23 am
      • waynekelland

        Please don’t put words in my mouth or assume my response.

        Yes I would actually. If any priests who were under suspension for child abuse claims (proven or false) were in a clerical collar (which is against the prohibition imposed by suspension) and/or undertaking ministry (private or public) then I would have had the collar removed and had them escorted off Vatican property. Afterwards they would be the subject of further sanctions for disobeying the suspension – just the same as Fr Gruner.

        Having said that please don’t deflect the subject by making comparisons with other’s wrongdoing. This is about Fr Gruner’s wrongdoing for which he has been tried, appealed to the highest roman court and has no further legal recourse except to recant and obey his bishop.

        November 17, 2013 at 9:29 pm
  • Theresa Rose

    In Fr Gruner’s third video, he mentions Catherine Pearson’s talk at the 2010 Fatima Conference in which she gave 6 reasons why the Consecration of Russia not been done. So have found the link, Catherine Pearson does mention these reasons which come in about the 23rd minute onwards. Surprisingly, one of the last reasons seems to be – some external threat to the Church if Russia is consecrated. See what you think.

    November 16, 2013 at 7:20 pm
    • crofterlady

      I finally got around to watching this and it is very scary. A friend of my Dad grew up with Fr. Malachi Martin and so knew him well. The friend said that this priest “is a mystery” and he was “so changed after returning from Rome”. Apparently he seemed haunted by something.

      November 21, 2013 at 3:56 pm
  • waynekelland

    Lily – FR GRUNER IS SUSPENDED. HE APPEALED AGAINST THE SUSPENSION TO THE HIGHEST CHURCH COURT IE THE APOLOSTOLIC SIGNATURE WHICH UPHELD THE DECISION SO THERE IS NO DOUBT IN THIS MATTER OF FACT. He may be free to follow his conscience but not under the mis-representation and lie of being a catholic priest in good standing which he clearly is not. He is also not free to do as he likes in Vatican city which is an independent state which can restrict his presence or actions within it’s territory as it see fit. This is precisely why even Cardinal Burke (a highly conservative prelate) refused to be present at the above mentioned conference during which Fr Gruner was scheduled to speak.

    November 16, 2013 at 7:34 pm
    • Josephine

      Father Gruner is not suspended. He has not committed any crime in church law that would allow him to be suspended. The link Theresa Rose gave is very clear and I’m copying it here:



      On September 12th Cardinal Castrillòn Hoyos of the Vatican’s Congregation for the Clergy purported to “confirm” a suspension of Father Nicholas Gruner, the Canadian priest who preaches the Message of Our Lady of Fatima, by the Bishop of Avellino, Italy. The Vatican itself imposed no “suspension”, but merely claims to be confirming what the Bishop of Avellino did.
      Father Gruner cannot be “suspended” by the Bishop of Avellino for at least three reasons.

      First, Church law (Can. 1321) provides that no one can be punished unless he has actually committed some offense with malice or culpability. The only “offense” which underlies the “suspension” is Father Gruner’s alleged failure to “return” to Avellino (where he was ordained in 1976) after he “failed” to find another bishop to incardinate him. However, members of the same Congregation which now announces Father Gruner’s “suspension” have personally intervened over the years to block three offers of incardination by different bishops outside of Avellino, all of whom wanted to foster Father Gruner’s Fatima apostolate.

      Thus, Father Gruner’s accusers have created the very “offense” of which they now accuse him. One cannot be guilty of an “offense” caused entirely by the actions of others. The “suspension” is thus plainly void and a mockery of Catholic justice.

      Second, the “suspension” purports to be based on Father Gruner’s failure to “to “obey” an order to “return” to Avellino and take up permanent residence in Italy after he was prevented by Vatican officials from finding another bishop. However, Father Gruner cannot reside in Italy without violating Italian immigration law. Since 1978 the Bishop of Avellino has taken no steps to secure a proper visa for Father Gruner, including written promises of a living wage, a pension and medical coverage. Indeed, the Bishop of Avellino has not provided one penny of support for Father Gruner since he gave him permission to leave Avellino 25 years ago. Why? Because the Bishop of Avellino himself is not interested in Father Gruner’s “return”, which has been orchestrated by a few Vatican officials who are interfering in the normal relations between a priest and his bishop.

      Quite simply, then, Father Gruner cannot be “ordered” to enter Italy as an illegal alien. Under Canon 22 the Church agrees to be bound by applicable civil law on immigration. Since Father Gruner cannot be forced to do what is illegal under civil law, his “suspension” is groundless.

      Third, even if there were a valid decree of suspension, in her mercy the Church recognizes that one is excused from a penalty if it was impossible or even “gravely inconvenient” to comply with the law that was allegedly violated. (Can. 1323) For example, one does not have to go to Mass on Sunday if one is ill.

      It would be impossible, and certainly gravely inconvenient, for Father Gruner to enter Italy as an illegal alien at the age of 59, leaving behind his life’s work, his home and all his personal affairs, and reside until death in a diocese which has made no provision for his support or old age and has never had a canonical mission for him because he cannot even speak the local dialect. Not even notoriously heretical or child-molesting priests have been subjected to such a harsh, unprecedented penalty.

      Finally, even if Father Gruner were validly “suspended” (which is not admitted), he is perfectly entitled to carry on non-priestly duties such as publishing books and magazines, organizing or speaking at conferences, or directing a private Apostolate. (Canons 321-323) Even Hans Kung, one of the most notorious heretics in living memory, remains a priest in good standing who continues to speak and publish whatever heresy he likes ù including the claim in his latest book that the papacy has no foundation in Scripture. Obviously, therefore, a wholly orthodox priest like Father Nicholas Gruner, who has done nothing wrong, has the right to teach sound Catholic orthodoxy concerning the Message of Fatima ù whether or not he is declared “suspended.”
      Indeed, it is Father Gruner’s legitimate teaching on Fatima to which his persecutors in the Vatican apparatus really object. Silencing any further call for the Consecration of Russia is what the “case” against Father Gruner is really about, although his persecutors can hardly admit this. The heresies of Kung and innumerable others like him in the priesthood do not alarm these Vatican officials, who do little or nothing to stop the spread of heresy. But the Message of Fatima, endorsed by God and approved by the Catholic Church, does seem to alarm them greatly ù why else would they announce Father Gruner’s “suspension” on a trumped-up charge only hours after the terrorist attack of September 11, 2001? Have they no shame?

      In their compulsion to silence Father Gruner at all costs, these Vatican officials trample on Canon 221: “Christ’s faithful have the right that no canonical penalties be inflicted upon them except in accordance with the law.” The law has not been followed, but rather perverted, in the case of Father Nicholas Gruner. And the result is that not only he, but the whole Church suffers detriment from a public travesty of justice: the guilty roam free while an innocent man is punished. Even worse, the right of the faithful to seek the truth about Fatima is denied. (Canon 748) THIS IS END OF THE LINK ARTICLE

      I copied this fact to emphasise:

      “Even Hans Kung, one of the most notorious heretics in living memory, remains a priest in good standing who continues to speak and publish whatever heresy he likes ù including the claim in his latest book that the papacy has no foundation in Scripture”

      You need to ask yourself why a priest like Fr Gruner who is devoted to Our Lady could be treated as badly as he is, while a public heretic like Kung is still a “priest in good standing.”

      November 16, 2013 at 9:37 pm
      • waynekelland

        Josephine – the info from the link you have provided is incorrect and misleading. It is a fabrication of the truth proposed by Fr Gruner.

        1) Fr Gruner’s bishop can and has suspended him, presumably for deserting his diocese without due permission and refusing to return when ordered to do so. Priests are no free entities. They cannot go wherever they wish to undertake whatever ministry they wish. They must work under episcopal oversight. They are obliged to be incardinated into a diocese or religious order.

        2) Cardinal Hoyos from the Congregation of the Clergy has confirmed that Fr Gruner is suspended. This situation occurred because Fr Gruner appealed his suspension by his diocesan bishop to the highest Vatican court – the Apostolic Signature. His appeal was heard and the decision was upheld.

        3) The Vatican do not need to add any additional penalty because by continuing to undertake a priestly ministry and wear clerical clothing Fr Gruner has in effect excommunicated himself. A decree of excommunication is not necessary as Fr Gruner has brought this state of affairs upon himself by his actions – according to canon law. Publishing books or undertaking speaking engagements are not private acts and do contradict the terms of his suspension.

        4) Hans Kung has nothing to do with Fr Gruner’s situation or circumstances. Fr Gruner is the only one responsible for his predicament. Nevertheless, Hans Kung has not contradicted his religious superiors or deserted his post. If he had done so, he would also have been suspended, and if he continued to obey his religious superiors then he would also be excommunicated.

        November 17, 2013 at 4:34 pm
    • 3littleshepherds


      You sure make Cardinal Burke appear intolerant. If you mean that the Cardinal wouldn’t even listen to someone else’s opinions because he disagrees! That sounds like intolerance to me.

      November 16, 2013 at 10:13 pm
      • 3littleshepherds

        And if you mean that the Cardinal wouldn’t listen to a speech Fr. Gruner gave because the Cardinal thought Fr. Gruner was suspended, would Cardinal Burke have listened to St. Athanasius?

        November 16, 2013 at 10:38 pm
      • waynekelland

        It’s not a matter of listening to Fr Gruner or allowing him to express his viewpoint, he does that anyway even though he has been disciplined against doing so. You don’t need to attend a conference to hear him speak in order to know what Fr Gruner’s opinions are – it’s a matter of the public record and all over the internet.

        Cardinal Burke didn’t attend the conference because his presence there would have given credibility to Fr Gruner’s erroneous beliefs and given the impression that Fr Gruner is a priest in good standing legitimately exercising his ministry with the authority of his bishop. Cardinal Burke didn’t think that Fr Gruner is suspended, Cardinal Burke knew it to be true because it is a fact that he is no longer incardinated to any diocese and his suspension and prohibition of priestly ministry has been unheld by the highest court of the Apostolic Signature (of which Cardinal Burke is the head). If you are under any doubt, write to the curia and ask for a written clarification.

        I read Fr Gruner’s webpage about his faculties and it is a joke. He refuses to return to his previously incardinated diocese and report to his bishop under the excuse that he cannot enter Italy as an immigrant. However, he was able to go Vatican city for the recent marian ceremonies so obviously he is actually able to travel to Italy and speak with his bishop as he has been ordered to do so. Fr Gruner doesn’t get to decide what pastoral work he undertakes, he is appointed to a position by his bishop and does so under his vows of priestly obedience. Currently he is working without any episcopal oversight – he is nothing more than a rogue and fly-by-night priest. I am not making that judgement. It is the reality of the situation by determination of the highest canonical court of the catholic church and there is no further right to appeal. Fr Gruner needs to stop pretending to act as a priest and meet his bishop and be obedient if he wants his faculties reinstated.

        November 16, 2013 at 11:02 pm
      • 3littleshepherds

        And what about St. Athanasius? We all know that he was unjustly excommunicated.
        Do you think that something like that can never happen again? Do you think that Cardinal Burke even has a chance of being wrong or ill-informed about the matter?
        What side would you have taken in St. Athanasius’ excommunication?

        November 16, 2013 at 11:14 pm
      • editor


        “And what about St. Athanasius? We all know that he was unjustly excommunicated.”

        No, that’s the trouble. Far too many Catholics DON’T know that St Athanasius was excommunicated, fewer still know that he was “unjustly” excommunicated and even fewer still know that he was unjustly excommunicated TWICE!

        Gimme patience with these attackers of Fr Gruner. None of us is perfect, of course, but to attack Fr Gruner when there are so many priests causing horrendous scandals who remain “in good standing” not to mention that they are protected and promoted, just leaves me speechless.

        November 16, 2013 at 11:33 pm
      • waynekelland

        Cardinal Burke doesn’t think Fr Gruner is suspended, he knows it because it is a fact and a reality that Fr Gruner refuses to accept.

        Fr Gruner is not St Athanasius and has nothing to do with Fr Gruner’s predicament. Fr Gruner is not a great theologian or Doctor of the church. Fr Gruner is not involved in a great fight against a doctrinal heresy by the Arians. Fr Gruner’s writing are not well regarded by the church fathers across the east and west. Fr Gruner is not a bishop like Athanasius, he is priest who refuses to accept the episcopal oversight of his bishop. No similarities whatsoever.

        November 17, 2013 at 9:52 pm
      • editor

        Well, there was a Cardinal present at the conference I attended in Rome. And he was delighted with what he heard, asking particularly for certain tapes of the talks.

        Cardinal Burke’s opinion is of no consequence to me after his cowardly withdrawal from the Pro Pontifice conference some years ago, under pressure from “liberals”. Of no interest whatsoever. If he arrived at my front door, soaked to the skin, shaking his soaking umbrella and saying it was pouring with rain, I’d go to the window to double check.

        You keep repeating the falsehoods about Fr Gruner despite the data posted by Josephine and Theresa Rose above. Travelling to Italy for a short visit is quite different from moving there to live, or hadn’t you notice that? I’ve been to Rome three times, but wouldn’t possibly be able to live there. Not only do I not speak Italian, I wouldn’t have a clue about the various dialects, However, your failure to acknowledge the legitimate reasons given to explain Father Gruner’s situation makes manifest your bad faith. You don’t mind peddling lies about this priest – why? Are you into the Medjugorje hoax? Is that it? That’s what I’ve found in the past. Those who hate Fr Gruner love the imaginary lady of Muddygorje. Gimme strength.

        November 16, 2013 at 11:30 pm
      • waynekelland

        I’m not a follower of the nonsense that is Muddygorgye thank you very much. I keep repeating that Fr Gruner is suspended because that is a canonical fact which cannot honestly be denied. It is you is peddling lies and distorting the facts in order to deceive people of good faith. Fr Gruner doesn’t have to immigrate to Italy, he can just travel there and speak with his bishop – that at least would be a measure of goodwill and a start in the right direction. He then needs to accept his bishop’s instructions and do whatever he is told in order to resume any priestly ministry. This former priest was originally incardinated into that diocese so the fact that he can’t speak fluent Italian obviously wasn’t an issue then and isn’t now.

        November 17, 2013 at 12:04 am
      • 3littleshepherds

        Here’s an excerpt from one Cardinal’s memoirs:

        ” The prophecy of Fatima was completely defied! It is a lack of sense, I would say because according to the interpretation that seems to me most worthy of consideration, the Third Secret – which John XXIII and his successors thought inopportune to reveal – is not about a supposed conversion of Russia, still far from becoming a reality, but regards the ‘revolution’ in the Catholic Church.

        From a Council convened to throw light on the beauty and profundity of the Christian mystery by presenting the Church as the spouse of Christ, according to the beautiful words of the same Pope John XXIII, so many innovations were born that they appear to constitute a true internal revolution.

        (Silvio Oddi,Il Tenero Mastino di Dio,Rome: Progetto Museali Editore, 1995, p. 217-218).

        This was from Cardinal Oddi’s book. The problem with Fr. Gruner is simply that some high ranking members of the Church want to silence the message of Fatima because it reveals them. It points out to the average Catholic that God is extremely displeased with those who would try to reinvent the Church and use it for their own purposes. The enemies of Our Lord want to shut him up. That’s not going to happen.

        Father Gruner has good lawyers. He knows what he can and cannot do under various laws. He has good Catholic lawyers.

        November 17, 2013 at 6:55 pm
      • waynekelland

        I haven’t checked your source which can’t be an original source because it is dated after Oddi’s death. I imagine it is a secondary source of doubtful reliability. However, Cardinal Oddi may have had an opinion but the Pope decided otherwise.

        Fr Gruner doesn’t need good lawyers, catholic or otherwise. WHAT IS IT THAT YOU CANNOT UNDERSTAND. He has been suspended from priestly ministry and the decision upheld by the Roman Rota of the Apostolic Signatura – the highest Vatican court which has the authority of the Roman Pontiff. There is no further appeal or legal recourse open to him except to recant and obey his bishop. Since he refuses to accept his fate and continues to pretend to be a cleric in good standing in order to continue his erroneous ministry, he has excommunicated himself. You cannot be a priest if you are excommunicated, surely even you can get that into your thick head.

        November 17, 2013 at 10:04 pm
      • 3littleshepherds


        That’s incorrect, Cardinal Oddi died in 2001.

        November 17, 2013 at 11:00 pm
      • waynekelland

        Apologies if that is so however I bet he didn’t write that book himself and it is a secondary (likely unreliable) source.

        November 17, 2013 at 11:17 pm
      • editor

        You admit that you don’t know why he was suspended. There was no reason given for his suspension – his bishop didn’t suspend him, nobody else admits to having suspended him. And you call ME a “thick head”?

        You cannot be suspended from priestly ministry for no reason.

        I’ll leave it there.

        November 18, 2013 at 12:25 am
      • waynekelland

        Comment removed.

        Note: every comment with a nasty personal remark, will be deleted.

        November 18, 2013 at 12:33 am
      • waynekelland

        His bishop did suspend him. He was required to return to his diocese in 30 days or face the penalty. He didn’t return so he was suspended. He didn’t like the decision so he appealed it to the highest roman court consisting of 5 cardinals who upheld the decision. But he still won’t accept the decision. He still does not abide by the suspension and continues to wear clerical attire and undertake priestly ministry so he’s basically excommunicated himself. Then he wonders why Vatican security tap him on the shoulder and ask him what he’s doing there and politely warn him not to cause any scene. Unbelievable!

        Tell me – after going to the Vatican for the marian ceremonies, why didn’t he report to his diocese and speak with his bishop? He obviously can return to Italy despite what he claims before. I’d also be interested to know, who paid for his travel and expenses and does his ‘ministry’ have audited accounts? The whole thing sounds like a sham. Beware.

        Editor: absolutely NONE of the above is true. You persist in error, rejecting the known truth. Unbelievable.

        November 18, 2013 at 12:42 am
  • Theresa Rose


    As Lily has said, Fr Gruner is not suspended and she has provided a link. I agree with her, but, if you still disagree, perhaps this link will help.


    Now, I wonder what you mean when you say:
    “To me this sounds like a whole load of fabricated nonsense and high jinx”.

    Fr Gruner had tickets to attend events in Rome. Fr. Gruner alone was singled out to be evicted from them.
    As he said himself, he had no intention of speaking to Pope Francis. Father caused no trouble at all.

    He was with others, who carried banners which asked the Pope to Consecrate Russia now. Why is that so terrible?

    That Our lady appeared to 3 children at Fatima six times in 1917, culminating with the Miracle of the Sun and reported by the secular press at the time. Our Lady made a request that the Pope and Bishops consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart. If carried out, it would see Russia’s conversion along with a period of peace.

    If not, Russia would spread her errors through out the world. The apparitions happened in May through to October 1917. What happened in Russia in 1917? The Russian revolution happened in which communistic atheism took control.

    There is certain hatred about the apparitions at Fatima. Our Lady prophesied about communistic errors being transported around the world. And of course, disasters. Lucia the eldest of the three children as an adult was asked to write what has become known as the Third Secret, which should have been made public about 1960 or upon the death of Sister Lucia, whichever came first. This has never been done. This Secret seems to have been buried deep within the Vatican. Amongst those who do not wish people to know about Fatima are some of the Hierarchy within the Vatican.

    Fabricated nonsense and high jinx. I don’t think so. But there are no reasons why you might not want to say what you think about Fatima.

    November 16, 2013 at 8:00 pm
  • Clotilde

    You dont need to emphasise your words with capitals or are you trying to convince yourself?
    Fr, gruner is in good standing and that has been discussed ad nauseam on this blog if you have ever followed it.it is a red herring which youare trying to bring in so that you can ignore the vital work that Fr. Gruner is doing to bring the truth about Fatima to the people in and out of the vatican.

    Sister Lucia was kept away from people and treated badly by the heirarchy because they didnt want the secret to be revealed. It was supposed to be given before 1960.(Before Vat 2) We all know that it must be about the loss of faith brought about by the way that vat 2 has changed church teaching; the changes to the Mass, false ecumenism, and the undermining of the authority of the Pope.

    November 16, 2013 at 9:35 pm
  • Clotilde

    Happy Feast Day of St. Margaret of Scotland everyone

    November 16, 2013 at 9:37 pm
    • editor

      Thanks Clotilde, but I still celebrate that on the 10th June !

      November 16, 2013 at 11:09 pm
  • waynekelland

    There is obviously need to use capitals because FR GRUNER IS SUSPENDED AND NOT A PRIEST IN GOOD STANDING THEREFORE SHOULD NOT BE EXERCISING ANY KIND OF MINISTRY WHATSOEVER. HE HAS NO VALID FACULTIES AND IS BEING DISHONEST PRETENDING OTHERWISE. This a matter of fact not opinion, whether you like this reality or not. I followed the link given and it shows no discussion lest proof to the contrary. There is no further appeal following the final decision of the Apostolic Signature so Fr Gruner’s suspension is valid and legally definitive. Furthermore, in continuing to exercise his priestly ministry and deliberately misleading the faithful that he is a priest in good standing when he objectively is not, he incurs a penalty of excommunication against himself. Presumably if Fr Gruner is able to make the necessary steps to act in accordance with his bishop and become incardinated again but he chooses not to. Ask Fr Gruner for a copy of his celebret and by his own admission he cannot show it to you because he does not have one because he is not incardinated and he is suspended from exercising his priestly, or any, ministry.

    Vatican security acted entirely correctly to let Fr Gruner know that he should not attempt anything unwise at these papal events. He is a suspended priest and thus should not be wearing clerical attire or a cassock – this is why they singled him out. Given his history of non obedience, his presence at these papal events was inappropriate and i’m not surprised attracted suspicion and attention.

    November 16, 2013 at 9:59 pm
    • editor


      You need to tell us what Fr Gruner did that, in Canon Law, incurred the penalty of excommunication. Once we know that, we can proceed.

      I was actually present in Rome at one of the Fatima Conferences when Father’s lawyer read out a letter from his Archbishop affirming that he is incardinated in the Archdiocese of (can’t spell it!) in India. He is, in fact, a priest in good standing, albeit unpopular with the Modernists who have a stranglehold on the Vatican right now.

      But if you have evidence to the contrary – let’s hear it. What did he do to incur such a penalty. Of what crime is he guilty?

      November 16, 2013 at 11:20 pm
      • waynekelland

        I don’t exactly know he was suspended and neither do I need to know because his appeal against the decision was upheld by the Apostolic Signature, the highest court of the catholic church to which there is no further appeal – the decision is definitive. I accept the judgement of the Apostolic Signature which acts under the full authority of the Roman Pontiff.

        Presumably Fr Gruner was originally suspended for not following the lawful directives of his bishop. He appears to have been working away from his diocese without permission and refused to return when ordered to do so by his bishop. The fact that he continues to exercise a doubtful ministry and wear clerical clothing while being under suspension means he incurs excommunication – that is what he is guilty of under canon law. He is no longer incardinated under the Archdiocese in India – to be incardinated requires the agreement of the originating diocese which he does not have. The decision of the AS means that ‘Father’ Gruner is de facto acting against the express wishes of the Pope.

        November 16, 2013 at 11:50 pm

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: